Border Security: Reassessment of Consular Resource Requirements  
Could Help Address Visa Delays (04-APR-06, GAO-06-542T).	 
                                                                 
In deciding to approve or deny a visa application, the Department
of State's (State) consular officers are on the front line of	 
defense in protecting the United States against those who seek to
harm U.S. interests. To increase border security following the	 
September 11 attacks, Congress, State, and the Department of	 
Homeland Security initiated a series of changes to border	 
security policies and procedures. These changes have added to the
complexity of consular workload. But consular officers must	 
balance this security responsibility against the need to	 
facilitate legitimate travel. In recent years, GAO has issued a  
series of reports on the visa process. This statement discusses  
(1) wait times for visas, (2) factors that affect wait times, and
(3) GAO's recent work on consular staffing.			 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-06-542T					        
    ACCNO:   A50837						        
  TITLE:     Border Security: Reassessment of Consular Resource       
Requirements Could Help Address Visa Delays			 
     DATE:   04/04/2006 
  SUBJECT:   Border security					 
	     Consulates 					 
	     Homeland security					 
	     Internal controls					 
	     Strategic planning 				 
	     Visas						 
	     Administrative procedures				 
	     Policies and procedures				 
	     Timeliness 					 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-06-542T

     

     * Summary
     * Background
     * Applicants May Face Extensive Wait Times for Visa Interviews
          * Officials, Groups Have Noted Impact of Visa Delays on U.S. S
     * Several Factors Contribute to Wait Times for Visas
          * Visa Policy and Procedural Changes Have Increased Consular W
          * Increasing Visa Demand Strains Consular Resources
          * Facilities Constraints Limit State's Options for Addressing
          * Staffing Shortfalls Impact the Effectiveness of Visa Operati
     * State Has Not Assessed Overall Consular Resource Needs
     * Conclusions
     * Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
     * GAO's Mission
     * Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
          * Order by Mail or Phone
     * To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
     * Congressional Relations
     * Public Affairs

Testimony

Before the Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

For Release on Delivery Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT

Tuesday, April 4, 2006

BORDER SECURITY

Reassessment of Consular Resource Requirements Could Help Address Visa
Delays

Statement of Jess T. Ford Director International Affairs and Trade

GAO-06-542T

April 4, 2006

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

I am pleased to be here to discuss GAO's observations on delays in the
nonimmigrant visa process.1 In deciding to approve or deny a visa
application, the Department of State's (State) consular officers at 211
visa-issuing posts overseas are on the front line of defense in protecting
the United States against potential terrorists and others whose entry
would likely be harmful to U.S. national interests. But consular officers
must balance this security responsibility against the need to facilitate
legitimate travel. Congress, State, and the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) have initiated a series of changes since the September 11
attacks to enhance border security policies and procedures. These changes
have added to the complexity of consular officers' workload. They have
also, in turn, contributed to the delays facing foreign citizens at some
posts who are seeking visas for travel to the United States. For example,
in February 2004, we reported that applicants had faced delays when
scheduling appointments for visa interviews at consular posts in China and
India.2 Although wait times in China have improved in recent months,
applicants in India continue to face long delays. Moreover, worldwide,
nine posts reported maximum wait times of 90 or more days in February
2006. In light of the increased workload per visa applicant due to
additional border security requirements, we recommended in October 2002
and again in September 20053 that State reassess its staffing
requirements.

Today I will discuss (1) wait times facing visa applicants, (2) factors
that affect wait times, and (3) our recent work on consular staffing
concerns. My statement covers a series of reports that we have issued
regarding the visa process and related areas. Over the course of our work
for these reports, we have reviewed relevant legislation and agency
documents, interviewed State's consular and human resource officials in
Washington, and observed visa operations and interviewed consular
officials at more than 20 consular posts. In addition, in 2005, we
interviewed consular staff at 25 overseas posts regarding issues such as
visa policies and procedures, staffing, and training. Our work was
conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards (see appendix I for a list of GAO reports).

1The United States also grants visas to people who intend to immigrate to
the United States. In this testimony, the term "visa" refers to
nonimmigrant visas only. Persons who may require nonimmigrant visas
include temporary business travelers and tourists.

2See GAO, Border Security: Improvements Needed to Reduce Time Taken to
Adjudicate Visas for Science Students and Scholars, GAO-04-371
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 25, 2004).

3See GAO, Border Security: Strengthened Visa Process Would Benefit From
Improvements in Staffing and Information Sharing, GAO-05-859 (Washington,
D.C.: Sept. 13, 2005), and GAO, Border Security: Visa Process Should Be
Strengthened as an Antiterrorism Tool, GAO-03-132NI (Washington, D.C.:
Oct. 21, 2002).

                                    Summary

Since September 11, 2001, applicants have faced extensive wait times for
visas at some posts. According to consular officials, posts that
consistently have wait times for visa interview appointments of 30 days or
longer may have a resource or management problem. State's data show that
between September 2005 and February 2006, 97 posts reported maximum wait
times of 30 or more days in at least one month; at 20 posts, the reported
wait times were in excess of 30 days for this entire 6-month period.4
Further, in February 2006, nine posts reported wait times in excess of 90
days. In Chennai, India, applicants applying for visas faced an average
reported wait time of 126 days over this 6-month period.

Several factors have contributed to delays for visa interview appointments
at some consular posts. For example, new policies and procedures
implemented since the September 11 attacks have strengthened the security
of the visa process; however, these new requirements have increased
consular workload and exacerbated delays. For example, consular officers
are now required to interview virtually all visa applicants. Additionally,
some applicants have faced additional delays because of special security
checks. Other factors, such as resurgence in visa demand, and ongoing
consular facility limitations, could continue to affect wait times.

In September 2005, we reported that State had not conducted a worldwide,
comprehensive assessment of staffing requirements for visa operations. In
commenting on a draft of that report, State argued that it had a staffing
plan. While State has increased hiring of consular officers, we continue
to see a need for such an assessment to ensure that State has sufficient
staff with the necessary skills at key consular posts, particularly in
light of the visa processing delays at some posts.

4According to consular officials, in cases where posts report wait time
data more than once in a given month, State's data are the maximum wait
time reported that month.

                                   Background

The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, is the primary body
of law governing immigration and visa operations.5 The Homeland Security
Act of 2002 generally grants DHS exclusive authority to issue regulations
on, administer, and enforce the Immigration and Nationality Act and all
other immigration and nationality laws relating to the functions of U.S.
consular officers in connection with the granting or denial of visas.6 As
we reported in July 2005, the act also authorizes DHS to, among other
things, assign employees to any consular post to review individual visa
applications and provide expert advice and training to consular officers
regarding specific security threats related to the visa process.7 A
subsequent September 2003 Memorandum of Understanding between State and
DHS further outlines the responsibilities of each agency with respect to
visa issuance. DHS is responsible for establishing visa policy, reviewing
implementation of the policy, and providing additional direction. State
manages the visa process, as well as the consular corps and its functions
at 211 visa-issuing posts overseas.

The process for determining who will be issued or refused a visa contains
several steps, including documentation reviews, in-person interviews,
collection of biometrics8 (fingerprints), and cross-referencing an
applicant's name against the Consular Lookout and Support System-State's
name-check database that posts use to access critical information for visa
adjudication. In some cases, a consular officer may determine the need for
a Security Advisory Opinion, which is a response from Washington on
whether to issue a visa to the applicant. Depending on a post's applicant
pool and the number of visa applications that a post receives, each stage
of the visa process varies in length.

5P.L. 82-414, 8 U.S.C. S: 1101 et seq.

6State retains authority in certain circumstances, as outlined in the act.
See P.L. 107-296.

7The act also requires that DHS on-site personnel in Saudi Arabia review
all visa applications prior to adjudication by consular officers. P.L.
107-296, Sec. 428(e) and Sec. 428(i). See GAO, Border Security: Actions
Needed to Strengthen Management of Department of Homeland Security's Visa
Security Program, GAO-05-801 (Washington, D.C.: July 29, 2005).

8Biometrics is a wide range of technologies that can be used to verify a
person's identity by measuring and analyzing that person's physiological
characteristics. For the purposes of this testimony, "biometric
identifiers" refers to fingerprints. See GAO, Technology Assessment: Using
Biometrics for Border Security, GAO-03-174 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 14,
2002).

          Applicants May Face Extensive Wait Times for Visa Interviews

According to consular officials, posts that consistently have wait times
for visa interview appointments of 30 days or longer may have a resource
or management problem. To monitor posts' workload, State requires that
posts report, on a weekly basis, the wait times for applicant interviews.9
As of March 2006, State's data showed that between September 2005 and
February 2006, 97 posts reported maximum wait times of 30 or more days in
at least one month; at 20 posts, the reported wait times were in excess of
30 days for the entire 6-month period. Moreover, in February 2006, nine
posts reported wait times in excess of 90 days (see table 1).

Table 1: Consular Posts with Maximum Reported Wait Times for Temporary
Business and Tourism Visa Interview Appointments in Excess of 90 Days,
February 2006

Post                   Maximum Wait Time in Days 
Chennai, India                               168 
Ciudad Juarez, Mexico                         92 
Havana, Cuba                                 129 
Mexico City, Mexico                          134 
Mumbai, India                                154 
New Delhi, India                              91 
Paris, France                                116 
Port Au Prince, Haiti                        167 
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil                       140 

Source: Department of State.

According to the Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs,
managing consular workload is a major issue for the department,
particularly at posts in India and China where volume is expected to
continue to increase. In February 2004,10 we reported that officials at
some of the posts we visited in India and China indicated they did not
have enough space and staffing resources to handle interview demands and
the new visa requirements. According to consular officers, during the 2003
summer months, the wait for visa interviews was as long as 12 weeks in
Chennai, India. In China, applicants at one post were facing waits of
about 5 to 6 weeks during our September 2003 visit due to an imbalance
between demand for visas and the number of consular officers available to
interview applicants and staff to answer phones. Although these posts have
undertaken initiatives to shorten the wait times, such as using temporary
duty help and instituting longer interviewing hours, delays for visa
interviews remain an ongoing concern. For example, the U.S. embassy in New
Delhi instituted a new appointment system in October 2005, which resulted
in immediate, additional interviewing capacity at post, according to
consular officials. However, reported wait times in New Delhi had risen
above 90 days by February 2006 (see table 2).

9Posts are asked to provide the appointment wait time applicable to the
majority of applicants applying for a given category of visas on a given
day, and not an average wait time. In September 2005, our analysis of
State's data on reported wait times revealed significant numbers of posts
that did not report on a weekly basis during the 6-month period we
reviewed. Therefore, the data were not sufficiently reliable to fully
determine how many posts had wait times in excess of 30 days. We
recommended that State ensure that consular chiefs update interview wait
time data on a weekly basis. For the purposes of this statement, the data
are sufficiently reliable to broadly indicate that delays for visa
appointments are an ongoing concern.

10 GAO-04-371 .

Table 2: Maximum Reported Wait Time in Days for Temporary Business and
Tourism Visa Interview Appointments at Posts in India, September 2005
through February 2006

Post             September      October November December January February 
India                                                             
Calcutta               111           96      101       94      94       86 
Chennai (Madras)       168          121      122       84     123      136 
Mumbai (Bombay)         79 Not reported       70      127     134      154 
New Delhi              140            9       24       40      74       91 

Source: Department of State.

At posts in China, Consular Affairs indicated that improvements in
facilities and staff increases have helped to lessen wait times for
interviews. However, consular officials have acknowledged that demand for
visas at posts in China is likely to rise and continue to affect wait
times in the future. Table 3 shows recent wait times for visa appointments
in China.

Table 3: Maximum Reported Wait Time in Days for Temporary Business and
Tourism Visa Interview Appointments at Posts in China, September 2005
through February 2006

Post      September October November December      January February 
China                                                      
Beijing          36      21       25       34           26       18 
Guangzhou        49      30       17       18 Not reported        1 
Shanghai         58      28       30       36           33       19 
Shenyang         35      12        2        7            6        8 

Source: Department of State.

  Officials, Groups Have Noted Impact of Visa Delays on U.S. Scientific and
  Business Interests

Although we have not attempted to measure the impact of the time it takes
to adjudicate a visa, we reported in February 2004 that consular officials
and representatives of several higher education, scientific, and
governmental organizations reported that visa delays could be detrimental
to the scientific interests of the United States. Although these officials
and representatives provided numerous individual examples of the
consequences of visa delays, they were unable to measure the total impact
of such lengthy waits. For example, in September 2003, Department of
Energy officials in Moscow explained that former Soviet Union scientists
have found it extremely difficult to travel to the United States to
participate in U.S. government-sponsored conferences and exchanges that
are critical to nonproliferation efforts. Business groups have also
expressed concern about the impact of visa delays. For example, officials
from the American Chamber of Commerce and other industry executives have
testified numerous times in recent years about the problem of delayed
entry for foreign nationals traveling to the United States for legitimate
business purposes. In addition, on June 2, 2004, a coalition of eight
industry associations published a study estimating that U.S. companies
suffered losses totaling $30 billion from July 2002 to March 2004 due to
delays and denials in the processing of business visas.11 Beijing's Deputy
Chief of Mission and consular officials at the embassy and consulates in
China also stated that visa delays could have a negative impact on student
and scholar exchanges.

11The Santangelo Group, Do Visa Delays Hurt U.S. Business? (Washington,
D.C.: June 2, 2004).

               Several Factors Contribute to Wait Times for Visas

Visa delays are a longstanding problem. However, since September 2001,
several factors have exacerbated wait times for visas. First, changes to
visa policies and procedures have resulted in additional workload for
consular officers. Second, while not reaching pre-2001 levels, visa
application volume has increased in recent years. Third, many posts face
facility constraints, which limit the extent to which posts can increase
visa processing. Finally, staffing shortfalls also affect the length of
time that applicants must wait for a visa.

Visa Policy and Procedural Changes Have Increased Consular Workload

Since the September 11 attacks, Congress, State, and DHS have initiated a
series of changes to policies and procedures designed to enhance border
security. These changes have added to the complexity of consular officers'
workload and, in turn, exacerbated State's resource constraints. These
changes include the following:

           o  Consular officers must interview virtually all visa applicants;
           prior to August 2003, they could routinely waive interviews.

           o  Since October 2004, consular officers are required to scan
           foreign nationals' right and left index fingers and clear the
           fingerprints through the DHS Automated Biometric Identification
           System before an applicant can receive a visa.12

           o  Some responsibilities previously delegated to Foreign Service
           nationals13 and consular associates14 have been transferred to
           consular officers. For example, consular associates are no longer
           authorized to adjudicate visas.
           o  As previously mentioned, some applicants have faced additional
           delays due to various special security checks, or Security
           Advisory Opinions. For example, foreign science students and
           scholars, who may pose a threat to our national security by
           illegally transferring sensitive technology, may be subject to
           security checks known as Visas Mantis. In the spring of 2003, it
           took an average of 67 days for Visas Mantis checks to be processed
           and for State to notify consular posts of the results. Since then,
           State and other agencies have taken actions which have reduced
           delays to about 15 days for these checks.15

           In addition, on July 13, 2005, the Secretary of Homeland Security
           announced that the U.S. government had adopted a 10-print standard
           for biometric collection for visas. In January 2006, the director
           of the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology
           program16 testified that moving to a 10-fingerscan standard from a
           2-print standard would allow the United States to be able to
           identify visa applicants and visitors with even greater accuracy.
           In February 2006, State reported that it plans to complete pilot
           testing and procurement of the 10-print equipment to ensure that
           all visa-issuing posts have collection capability by the end of
           fiscal year 2007. Requiring applicants to submit 10-prints could
           add more time to the applicant's interview and potentially delay
           visa processing.

           To help mitigate the adverse impact of these policy and procedural
           changes on wait times, State has taken actions to help maintain
           the right balance between promoting security and facilitating
           travel. For example, while we have not assessed the impact of
           these actions, all overseas posts have established procedures to
           expedite the processing of business visas and are working closely
           with local American Chambers of Commerce in more than 100
           countries to expedite the visa process for bona fide business
           travelers. In July 2005, State also established a Business Visa
           Center to facilitate visa application procedures for U.S.
           businesses in conjunction with upcoming travel or events.
           Regarding foreign students, in February 2006, State announced that
           it has extended the length of time foreign students may be issued
           student visas, which will allow some students to apply up to 120
           days before their academic program start date (as compared to 90
           days under previous regulations).17 According to State, U.S.
           embassies and consulates also have established special, expedited
           visa interviews for prospective foreign students.

           While not returning to levels prior to the September 11 attacks,
           visa issuance rates increased in fiscal years 2004 and 2005,
           according to State's data (see fig. 1). Should application volume
           continue to increase, State has acknowledged that additional
           management actions will be necessary to ensure that visa
           applications are processed in a timely manner.

           Figure 1: Worldwide Visa Issuance Volume, Fiscal Years 1992
           through 2005

           Note: According to State, the data for fiscal year 2005 are
           preliminary as of November 23, 2005, and are subject to change.

           In the future, we believe that increased global trade and economic
           growth will likely result in increased demand for visas,
           particularly in certain countries.

           Embassy facilities at some posts limit the number of visa
           applications that are processed each day and make it difficult to
           keep up with visa demand. In our September 2005 report, we noted
           that many visa chiefs we interviewed reported problems with their
           facilities. For example, at 14 of the 25 posts covered in our
           survey, consular officials rated their workspace as below average,
           and 40 percent reported that applicants' waiting rooms were below
           average. In addition, due to overcrowded waiting rooms at four of
           the eight posts we visited, we observed visa applicants waiting
           for their interviews outside or in adjacent hallways. Moreover, a
           limited number of security guards and screening devices, as well
           as limited physical space, often create bottlenecks at the
           facilities' security checkpoints. In March 2006, we observed visa
           facilities in Paris, France, and noted that there are insufficient
           adjudicating windows to meet visa demand. A senior consular
           official acknowledged that many consular facilities are located in
           run-down buildings with insufficient adjudicating windows and
           waiting rooms. In fiscal year 2003, Congress directed the Overseas
           Building Operations Bureau to begin a 3-year Consular Workspace
           Improvement Initiative to improve the overall working environment
           for consular officers.18 In fiscal years 2003 and 2004, State
           obligated $10.2 million to 79 workspace improvement projects at 68
           posts. However, according to a senior consular official, these
           funds are being used to provide temporary solutions at posts that
           may require a new embassy as part of State's multibillion-dollar
           embassy construction program. It may take years before some posts'
           facilities needs are fully addressed.

           To have sufficient resources to manage the demand for visas and
           minimize the time applicants must wait, State may need to consider
           establishing new visa-issuing posts. Indeed, in its 2005
           inspection of the Embassy in New Delhi, for example, the Office of
           the Inspector General stated that State should establish a
           permanent consulate in Hyderabad, India, by no later than 2008 in
           light of the need for expanded visa processing facilities due to
           increased application volume. In March 2006, the President
           announced that the United States would open a new consulate;
           however, it is unclear when this may happen.

           In September 2005, we reported that State faced staffing
           shortfalls in consular positions-a key factor affecting the
           effectiveness of the visa process and the length of time
           applicants must wait for visas. As of April 30, 2005, we found
           that 26 percent of midlevel consular positions were either vacant
           or filled by an entry-level officer.19 In addition, almost
           three-quarters of the vacant positions were at the FS-03
           level-midlevel officers who generally supervise entry-level staff.
           Consular officials attribute this shortfall to low hiring levels
           prior to the Diplomatic Readiness Initiative20 and the necessary
           expansion of entry-level positions to accommodate increasing
           workload requirements after September 11, 2001. We believe
           experienced supervision at visa-issuing posts is important to
           avoiding visa delays. For example, experienced officers may
           provide guidance to entry-level officers on ways to expedite visa
           processing, including advising staff on when special security
           checks are required.

           During our February 2005 visits to Riyadh and Jeddah, Saudi
           Arabia, and Cairo, Egypt, we observed that the consular sections
           were staffed with entry-level officers on their first assignment
           with no permanent midlevel visa chief to provide supervision and
           guidance. Although these posts had other mid- or seniorlevel
           consular officers, their availability on visa issues was limited
           because of their additional responsibilities. For example, the
           head of the visa section in Jeddah was responsible for managing
           the entire section, as well as services for American citizens due
           to a midlevel vacancy in that position. At the time of our visit,
           the Riyadh Embassy did not have a midlevel visa chief. Similarly,
           in Cairo, there was no permanent midlevel supervisor between the
           winter of 2004 and the summer of 2005, and Consular Affairs used
           five temporary staff on a rotating basis during this period to
           serve in this capacity. Entry-level officers we spoke with stated
           that due to the constant turnover, the temporary supervisors were
           unable to assist them adequately. At the U.S. consulate in Jeddah,
           entry-level officers expressed concern about the lack of a
           midlevel supervisor. More recently, during a February 2006 visits
           to posts in Nigeria and China, we found similar consular
           vacancies. For example, first tour, entry-level officers in
           Chengdu and Shenyang, China, are filling midlevel consular
           positions.

           We have reported on numerous occasions that factors such as
           staffing shortages have contributed to long wait times for visas
           at some posts. Since 2002, State has received funding to address
           these shortfalls. Through the Diplomatic Readiness Initiative and
           other sources, State increased the number of Foreign Service
           officer consular positions by 364, from 1,037 in fiscal year 2002
           to 1,401 in fiscal year 2005. However, while we have not studied
           this issue, the disparity in wait times among posts may indicate
           the need to reallocate positions to address the growing consular
           demand and long wait times at some posts.

           In the event of staffing shortfalls, State has mechanisms for
           requesting increased staff resources. For example, if the Consular
           Affairs Bureau identifies a need for additional staff in
           headquarters or overseas, it may request that the Human Resources
           Bureau establish new positions. In addition, posts can also
           describe their needs for additional positions through their
           consular package-a report submitted annually to the Consular
           Affairs Bureau that details workload statistics and staffing
           requirements, among other things. For example, in December 2004,
           during the course of our work, the consular section in Riyadh
           reported to Washington that there was an immediate need to create
           a midlevel visa chief position at post, and consular officials
           worked with human resource officials to create this position,
           which, according to State officials, would be filled by summer
           2005.

           State's current assignment process does not guarantee that all
           authorized positions will be filled, particularly at hardship
           posts. Historically, State has rarely directed its employees to
           serve in locations for which they have not bid on a position,
           including hardship posts or locations of strategic importance to
           the United States, due to concerns that such staff may be more apt
           to have poor morale or be less productive.21 Due to State's
           decision to not force assignments, along with the limited amount
           of midlevel officers available to apply for them,22 important
           positions may remain vacant.

           According to a deputy assistant secretary for human resources,
           Consular Affairs can prioritize those positions that require
           immediate staffing to ensure that officers are assigned to fill
           critical staffing gaps. For example, Consular Affairs could choose
           not to advertise certain positions of lesser priority during an
           annual assignment cycle. However, senior Consular Affairs
           officials acknowledged that they rarely do this. According to
           these officials, Consular Affairs does not have direct control
           over the filling of all consular positions and can often face
           resistance from regional bureaus and chiefs of mission overseas
           who do not want vacancies at their posts. Thus, as we have
           previously reported, certain high-priority positions may not be
           filled if Foreign Service officers do not bid on them.

           In commenting on a draft of our September 2005 report, State
           disagreed with our recommendation that it prepare a comprehensive
           plan to address vulnerabilities in consular staffing. State argued
           that it already had such a plan. Moreover, State claimed that it
           appreciates that priority positions must be filled worldwide based
           on the relative strategic importance of posts and positions. While
           State argued that every visa consular officer is serving a
           strategic function, the department identified one post, Embassy
           Baghdad, as a clear example of a priority post. Further, State
           acknowledged that it has fewer midlevel consular officers than it
           needs. We continue to believe it is incumbent on the department to
           conduct a worldwide analysis to identify high-priority posts and
           positions, such as supervisory consular positions in posts with
           high-risk applicant pools or those with high workloads and long
           wait times for applicant interviews. Although State noted that it
           anticipated addressing this shortage of midlevel consular
           officers, it did not indicate when that gap would be filled.

           On January 18, 2006, the Secretary of State announced the
           department's plan to restructure overseas and domestic staffing.
           This plan aims to shift U.S. diplomatic personnel from European
           posts and headquarters offices to posts in Africa, South Asia, the
           Middle East, and elsewhere. While we have not conducted a
           comprehensive review of this initiative, only midlevel political,
           economic, and public diplomacy officers, and not consular
           officers, would comprise the initial realignment of 100 positions,
           according to State officials.

           In February 2006, consular officials told us that, since our
           report, they concluded a review of consular position grades to
           ensure that they reflect the work requirements for each consular
           position. Based on this analysis, consular officials recommended
           that 47 positions be upgraded-from an entry- to midlevel position,
           for example-to reconcile the management structures of posts that
           have undergone rapid growth. However, State's bidding and
           assignment process does not guarantee that the positions of
           highest priority will always be filled with qualified officers.
           Therefore, a further assessment is needed to ensure that State has
           determined its staffing requirements and placed the right people
           in the right posts with the necessary skill levels.

           The visa process presents a balance between facilitating
           legitimate travel and identifying those who might harm the United
           States. State, in coordination with other agencies, has made
           substantial improvements to the visa process to strengthen it as a
           national security tool. However, given the large responsibility
           placed on consular officers, particularly entry-level officers, it
           is critical to provide consular posts with the resources necessary
           for them to be effective. Indeed, extensive delays for visa
           interview appointments point to the need for State to perform a
           rigorous assessment of staffing requirements to achieve its goal
           of having the right people with the right skills in the right
           places.

           Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I will be
           happy to answer any questions you or Members of the Committee may
           have.

           For questions regarding this testimony, please call Jess T. Ford,
           (202) 512-4128 or [email protected]. Individuals making key
           contributions to this statement include John Brummet, Assistant
           Director, and Kathryn Bernet, Eugene Beye, Joseph Carney, and Jane
           Kim.

           Border Security: Strengthened Visa Process Would Benefit From
           Improvements in Staffing and Information Sharing. GAO-05-859 .
           September 13, 2005.

           Border Security: Actions Needed to Strengthen Management of
           Department of Homeland Security's Visa Security Program.
           GAO-05-801 . July 29, 2005.

           Border Security: Streamlined Visas Mantis Program Has Lowered
           Burden on Foreign Science Students and Scholars, but Further
           Refinements Needed. GAO-05-198 . February 18, 2005.

           Border Security: State Department Rollout of Biometric Visas on
           Schedule, but Guidance Is Lagging. GAO-04-1001 . September 9,
           2004.

           Border Security: Additional Actions Needed to Eliminate Weaknesses
           in the Visa Revocation Process. GAO-04-795 . July 13, 2004.

           Visa Operations at U.S. Posts in Canada. GAO-04-708R . May 18,
           2004.

           Border Security: Improvements Needed to Reduce Time Taken to
           Adjudicate Visas for Science Students and Scholars. GAO-04-371 .
           February 25, 2004.

           State Department: Targets for Hiring, Filling Vacancies Overseas
           Being Met but Gaps Remain in Hard-to-Learn Languages. GAO-04-139 .
           November 19, 2003.

           Border Security: New Policies and Procedures Are Needed to Fill
           Gaps in the Visa Revocation Process. GAO-03-798 . June 18, 2003.

           Border Security: Implications of Eliminating the Visa Waiver
           Program. GAO-03-38 . November 22, 2002.

           Technology Assessment: Using Biometrics for Border Security.
           GAO-03-174 . November 15, 2002.

           Border Security: Visa Process Should Be Strengthened as an
           Antiterrorism Tool. GAO-03-132NI . October 21, 2002.

           State Department: Staffing Shortfalls and Ineffective Assignment
           System Compromise Diplomatic Readiness at Hardship Posts.
           GAO-02-626 . June 18, 2002.

           State Department: Tourist Visa Processing Backlogs Persist and
           U.S. Consulates. GAO/NSIAD-98-69 . March 13, 1998.

           State Department: Backlogs of Tourist Visas at U.S. Consulates.
           GAO/NSIAD-92-185 . April 30, 1992.

           The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
           investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in
           meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve
           the performance and accountability of the federal government for
           the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds;
           evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses,
           recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
           informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
           commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
           accountability, integrity, and reliability.

           The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at
           no cost is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday,
           GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on
           its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted
           products every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe
           to Updates."

           The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies
           are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the
           Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
           Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are
           discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:

           U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
           Washington, D.C. 20548

           To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax:
           (202) 512-6061

           Contact:

           Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail:
           [email protected] Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or
           (202) 512-7470

           Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400
           U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
           Washington, D.C. 20548

           Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
           512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW,
           Room 7149 Washington, D.C. 20548

12The Automated Biometric Identification System is a DHS database that
includes some 5 million people who may be ineligible to receive a visa.
For example, the Automated Biometric Identification System data includes,
among other records, FBI information on all known and suspected
terrorists, selected wanted persons, and previous criminal histories for
individuals from high-risk countries. See GAO, Border Security: State
Department Rollout of Biometric Visas on Schedule, but Guidance Is
Lagging, GAO-04-1001 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 9, 2004).

13Foreign Service national employees are non-U.S. citizens employed at a
U.S. Foreign Service post by a U.S. government agency.

14Consular associates are U.S. citizens and relatives of U.S. government
direct-hire employees overseas who, following successful completion of the
required Basic Consular Course, are hired by the Consular Section at their
post. Beginning in fiscal year 2002, State began a 3-year transition to
remove adjudication functions from consular associates and provide
additional consular officers.

15GAO, Border Security: Streamlined Visas Mantis Program Has Lowered
Burden on Foreign Science Students and Scholars, but Further Refinements
Needed, GAO-05-198 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 18, 2005).

16US-VISIT is a government wide program to collect, maintain, and share
information on foreign nationals and better control and monitor the entry,
visa status, and exit of visitors. Under the program, most foreign
visitors are required to submit to fingerprint scans of their right and
left index finger and have a digital photograph taken upon arrival at U.S.
ports of entry. As a complement to US-VISIT, State implemented the
Biometric Visa Program at all visa-issuing overseas consulates on October
26, 2004. See Section 303 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry
Reform Act of 2002, P.L. 107-173.

Increasing Visa Demand Strains Consular Resources

17These changes apply only to initial-entry students.

Facilities Constraints Limit State's Options for Addressing Visa Delays

18See House Conference Report 108-10, attached to P.L. 108-7, Consolidated
Appropriations Resolution, 2003.

Staffing Shortfalls Impact the Effectiveness of Visa Operations

19Foreign Service officers are assigned a grade, which ranges from FS-06
to FS-01, corresponding from entry-level to midlevel, respectively.
According to State, officers at grades 6 through 4 are classified as
junior officers; 3 through 1 are midlevel officers. In addition, members
of the senior Foreign Service are senior officers. In this testimony, we
refer to them as entry-level, midlevel, and senior-level officers.

20In fiscal year 2002, State launched the Diplomatic Readiness
Initiative-a 3-year effort to ensure global diplomatic readiness-through
which State reported that it hired 834 Foreign Service officers. In
addition, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
authorized the hiring of an additional 150 consular officers per year for
fiscal years 2006 through 2009. See P.L. 108-458 S: 7203.

             State Has Not Assessed Overall Consular Resource Needs

21State defines hardship posts as those locations where the U.S.
government provides differential pay incentives-an additional 5 percent to
25 percent of base salary depending on the severity or difficulty of the
conditions-to encourage employees to bid on assignments to these posts and
to compensate them for the hardships they encounter. See GAO, State
Department: Staffing Shortfalls and Ineffective Assignment System
Compromise Diplomatic Readiness at Hardship Posts, GAO-02-626 (Washington,
D.C.: June 18, 2002).

22The assignment process begins when Foreign Service employees who are
eligible to be transferred from their current assignment each year receive
a list of instructions and upcoming vacancies for which they may compete.
Staff then must submit a list of those positions for which they want to be
considered.

                                  Conclusions

                       Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

Appendix I: Related GAO Products

(320415)

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

GAO's Mission

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Congressional Relations

Public Affairs

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-542T.

To view the full product, including the scope

and methodology, click on the link above.

For more information, contact Jess Ford at (202) 512-4128 or
[email protected].

Highlights of GAO-06-542T, a testimony before the Committee on Government
Reform, House of Representatives

April 4, 2006

BORDER SECURITY

Reassessment of Consular Resource Requirements Could Help Address Visa
Delays

In deciding to approve or deny a visa application, the Department of
State's (State) consular officers are on the front line of defense in
protecting the United States against those who seek to harm U.S.
interests. To increase border security following the September 11 attacks,
Congress, State, and the Department of Homeland Security initiated a
series of changes to border security policies and procedures. These
changes have added to the complexity of consular workload. But consular
officers must balance this security responsibility against the need to
facilitate legitimate travel. In recent years, GAO has issued a series of
reports on the visa process. This statement discusses (1) wait times for
visas, (2) factors that affect wait times, and (3) GAO's recent work on
consular staffing.

What GAO Recommends

We recommended in October 2002 and again in September 2005 that State
reassess its consular staffing requirements. In commenting on a draft of
our September 2005 report, State disagreed with our recommendation that it
prepare a plan to address consular requirements. In light of the increased
workload due to additional border security requirements and ongoing
staffing shortages and processing delays at some posts, we continue to
urge State to fully assess its resource needs to ensure it has the right
people at key posts.

As a result of changes since September 11, 2001, aimed at strengthening
visa policies and procedures, applicants have faced extensive wait times
for visas at some posts. According to consular officials, posts that
consistently have wait times of 30 days or longer for interview
appointments may have a resource problem. During a recent 6-month period,
97 of State's 211 visa-issuing posts reported maximum wait times of 30 or
more days in at least one month; at 20 posts, the reported wait times were
in excess of 30 days for this entire 6-month period. Further, in February
2006, 9 posts reported wait times in excess of 90 days.

Several factors have contributed to these delays at some consular posts.
For example, Congress, State, and the Department of Homeland Security have
initiated new policies and procedures since the September 11 attacks to
strengthen the security of the visa process; however, these new
requirements have increased consular workload and exacerbated delays.
Additionally, some applicants have faced additional delays because of
special security checks for national security concerns. Other factors,
such as resurgence in visa demand and ongoing embassy facility
limitations, could continue to affect wait times.

We recently reported that State had not conducted a worldwide,
comprehensive assessment of staffing requirements for visa operations.
While State has increased hiring of consular officers, there is a need for
such an assessment to ensure that State has sufficient staff at key
consular posts, particularly in light of the visa processing delays at
some posts.

Consular Posts with Maximum Reported Wait Times for Temporary Business and
Tourism Visa Interview Appointments in Excess of 90 Days, February 2006

Post                   Maximum Wait Time in Days 
Chennai, India                               168 
Ciudad Juarez, Mexico                         92 
Havana, Cuba                                 129 
Mexico City, Mexico                          134 
Mumbai, India                                154 
New Delhi, India                              91 
Paris, France                                116 
Port Au Prince, Haiti                        167 
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil                       140 

Source: Department of State

Note: These data are based on reports from overseas consular posts to the
Consular Affairs Bureau in Washington, D.C. According to consular
officials, in cases where posts report wait time data more than once in a
given month, State's data are the maximum wait time reported that month.
*** End of document. ***